Trump Favors Swift, Decisive Military Strikes on Iran Amid Escalating Protests, Sources Reveal

By Perplexity News Staff | January 15, 2026

Washington, D.C. – President Donald Trump is reportedly leaning toward swift and decisive military action against Iran, prioritizing airstrikes over large-scale troop deployments, according to multiple sources familiar with the administration’s deliberations.

The preference for rapid, targeted operations comes amid widespread protests in Iran that have spiraled into a major challenge to the regime. Demonstrations, initially sparked by staggering inflation and harsh government policies in December, have spread nationwide. Iranian security forces have responded with brutal crackdowns, killing up to 2,000 protesters, human rights groups estimate.[1]

Trump’s rhetoric has intensified in parallel. In a Truth Social post on Tuesday, he warned that Iran’s ‘killers and abusers’ within the regime ‘will pay a big price.’ This follows a pattern of escalating U.S. responses, including last June’s Operation Midnight Hammer, where American B-2 stealth bombers and submarine-launched cruise missiles struck Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.[1][3]

Limited Options, High Stakes

Despite Trump’s boasts of having ‘many military options,’ analysts note his choices are constrained. A large ground invasion remains off the table, with even top Republican allies in Congress expressing reluctance for ‘boots on the ground.’ ‘It’s not for us to invade Iran, it’s to protect the Iranian people,’ said Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.). Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) advocated for ‘non-kinetic solutions’ like intensified sanctions coordinated with allies.[1]

Instead, military planners are focusing on precision airstrikes from existing Gulf bases or global strike missions launched directly from the U.S. Retired Adm. John Miller, former commander of U.S. Navy forces in the Middle East, explained that no massive buildup of troops, ships, or aircraft in the Gulf is necessary. ‘What we would see is something that either comes from some of our bases in the Gulf or something that’s a global strike mission,’ Miller said, targeting ‘centers of gravity for the regime’ such as command bunkers, military sites, and communications nodes.[1]

Offensive cyberattacks are also under consideration if diplomatic efforts fail, sources indicate. This approach aligns with Trump’s second-term strategy, which has already seen expansions in counterterrorism operations, including bombings in Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, and strikes on Houthi militants in Yemen.[3]

Background of Tensions

The current crisis builds on months of friction. In June 2025, the International Atomic Energy Agency declared Iran violating nonproliferation commitments, just weeks from weapons-grade uranium enrichment. Israel launched preemptive strikes on nuclear sites and leaders, prompting Trump to abandon ongoing U.S.-Iran talks. The subsequent U.S. strikes, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, were hailed by Trump as having ‘completely and totally obliterated’ the facilities. U.S. intelligence later assessed the damage as temporary, setting back the program by only months.[3]

Protests have since erupted, fueled by economic woes and regime repression. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has been on the front lines of the crackdown, drawing calls for targeted action. Former UK Deputy Foreign Secretary Andrew Mitchell urged the U.S. to ‘seriously consider’ military moves against the IRGC to instill ‘the fear of God’ in the force responsible for protester deaths.[2]

“I do hope he is seriously considering taking military action against the IRGC,” Mitchell stated in a recent interview.[2]

Congressional Caution, International Echoes

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Senate Armed Services Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) confirmed they have not been briefed on potential strikes, signaling limited congressional buy-in so far. This hesitation underscores broader wariness about entanglement in another Middle East conflict.

Trump’s approach echoes his first term’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign, combining sanctions with the threat of force to fracture the regime from within. Mitchell noted Trump’s long-held view that popular unrest and external pressure could topple Iran’s leadership without direct invasion.[2]

Broader Second-Term Military Posture

Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has pursued an aggressive military posture. Beyond Iran, operations have included capturing Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro after bombings there, counterterrorism in Iraq against ISIS, and responses to attacks on U.S. personnel in Syria. Threats have extended to potential actions in Colombia and even musings about acquiring Greenland by force.[3]

Critics argue this risks escalation, while supporters see it as necessary deterrence against adversaries. As protests rage in Iran, the world watches whether Trump’s ‘swift and decisive’ preference translates to action—and what price the regime might indeed pay.

This article synthesizes reports from Politico, Times News, and the Council on Foreign Relations. Developments are ongoing.